You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Next generation sequencing and functional analysis of patient urine renal progenitor-derived podocytes to unravel the diagnosis underlying refractory lupus nephritis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1093/ndt/gfw234 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Paola Romagnani, Sabrina Giglio, Maria Lucia Angelotti, Aldesia Provenzano, Francesca Becherucci, Benedetta Mazzinghi, Susanna Müller, Kerstin Amann, Marc Weidenbusch, Simone Romoli, Elena Lazzeri, Hans-Joachim Anders |
| Abstract |
Often the cause of refractory lupus nephritis (RLN) remains unclear. We performed next-generation sequencing for podocyte genes in an RLN patient and identified compound heterozygosity for APOL1 risk alleles G1 and G2 and a novel homozygous c.[1049C>T]+[1049C>T] NPHS1 gene variant of unknown significance. To test for causality renal progenitor cells isolated from urine of this patient were differentiated into podocytes in vitro. Podocytes revealed aberrant nephrin trafficking, cytoskeletal structure and lysosomal leakage, and increased detachment as compared with podocytes isolated from controls. Thus, lupus podocytopathy can be confirmed as a cause of RLN by functional genetics on patient-derived podocytes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 2 | 17% |
| Sweden | 1 | 8% |
| Ecuador | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 8 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 9 | 75% |
| Scientists | 3 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 9% |
| Professor | 2 | 9% |
| Researcher | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 6 | 27% |
| Unknown | 4 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 45% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 9% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 27% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 08 June 2021.
All research outputs
#4,982,525
of 24,862,965 outputs
Outputs from Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation
#1,799
of 6,373 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,621
of 361,559 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation
#17
of 99 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,862,965 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 79th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,373 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 361,559 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 99 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.